On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 07:29 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The pit clocksource could be dropped pretty easy with my clocksource > > update patches, which I'm still working on but you could easily drop > > clock sources that aren't atomic like the pit .. Also the pit is > > generally undesirable, so it's not going to be missed. > > that's totally unacceptable, and i'm amazed you are even suggesting it - > often the PIT ends up being the most reliable hardware clock in a PC. > Btw., what's wrong with the spinlock that is protecting PIT access? It > expresses the non-atomic property of the PIT just fine.
Just considering the rating is lower than the acpi_pm (and the TSC), and it's not even considered on SMP systems is enough for me .. It's just a problematic clock.. Again, I'm not suggesting we drop it all the time, just for a special case when Mathieu needs it dropped. Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
